Topic: [ANN][XRB]Cryptocurrency's killer app: RaiBlocks micropayments - page 90. (Read 775279 times)
March 18, 2018, 06:45:56 PM
modest projects made for people become successful themselves, as it was with Facebook and with many other companies, and bitcoin is very similar to this coin
March 18, 2018, 04:43:24 PM
A perspective from the creator of Nanex: There is no issue with Nano. It is an issue with using the RPC improperly.
https://www.reddit.com/r/nanocurrency/comments/7wvfkx/a_perspective_from_the_creator_of_nanex_there_is/
https://www.reddit.com/r/nanocurrency/comments/7wvfkx/a_perspective_from_the_creator_of_nanex_there_is/
Quote
There's a lot of FUD going around right now, primarily sparked by Francesco Firano and now with KuCoin coming out and saying they were having a 'double-spend' issue too. I'd like to point out that Kucoin fixed this issue immediately and compensated their ledger with their own funds. They did not attempt to sweep it under the rug and the issue was not wide-spread at Kucoin whatsoever, so kudos to them.
But let's get right down to the point of this post, the tl;dr:
There is no issue with the Nano protocol nor the Nano node. There is no double spending going on. The RPC API was being used improperly.
These issues are not 'double spend' in the traditional sense. Double spend assumes someone spent the same funds twice, which would be a major problem in any cryptocurrency and is basically the primary thing that has to be defeated in any cryptocurrency. That is not what is happening, nor was it ever what happened at Bitgrail nor KuCoin. People freak out when they hear 'double spend', and for good reason, but that is NOT what has been going on.
What happened in both the Bitgrail and Kucoin situations was an improper use of the RPC API.
In the RPC, there are two ways to do things:
1. Use the account/wallet system built into the node and allow the node to do everything for you, including sending money without you ever touching a raw block
2. Keep track of your private keys yourself, store nothing in the node, and only use the node for receiving transaction notifications, reviewing the Nano ledger, and broadcasting blocks you sign yourself outside of the node. (how Nanex does it)
Option 1: why it was used, why it exists, and why it's a bad idea
Option 1 is easy, and is how things are done for most traditional coin integrations on exchanges. Nano has that option, but it was never meant to be used by large services like exchanges. It was meant so someone could build their own UI or just use the command-line. It has its own use case, but not for exchanges.
The primary issue with doing it this way is that sends are not idempotent. Idempotency means that if I were to send the request more than once, it would only perform the action once or it would effectively have the same result. In this case, all you are doing is telling the node 'send X amount to this address'. It doesn't care if you already tried doing it before. It doesn't know if you're retrying something or just sending out more funds again. Since it's not idempotent, this means that any retry code in the case of intermittent failure could possibly end up sending out a transaction more than once.
There's also a variety of other issues like not being able to have fine-tuned control over what's happening, having much more difficulty in scaling across multiple nodes, etc.
This was the method that Bitgrail and Kucoin used. As a result, if anything in the system failed or resent a message for whatever reason, it would effectively 'double withdraw'. Again, I can't state this enough, it is not an issue in the NANO protocol. This is an issue in using the nano node properly.
Option 2: the proper way of doing things
If you keep track of your private keys yourself and only use the offline signing methods, this situation becomes much more unlikely. Your transactions become idempotent.
In the Nanex database, when a withdrawal request is submitted there is a unique identifier for that withdrawal. Your funds are immediately taken out of your Nanex wallet. Only then is the request sent to the actual nano node control system. It finds one of our hot accounts with an appropriate balance, locks the account for any further transactions, and creates and signs the block for the withdrawal. This block is then stored in the database with your unique withdrawal request ID.
All of this so far has not touched the node. When the block is ready, it will be sent to one of our nodes to be broadcasted. If, for whatever reason, that fails - it can be retried again because we're sending the exact same raw, signed block to the node. No matter what, a 'double spend' cannot occur because the operation is idempotent.
At this point, the account is still locked so no further withdrawals or deposits can be made to it. Our other nodes listen on the network to ensure it was broadcasted, and once it reaches consensus the account is unlocked for further transactions and the withdrawal is considered complete.
With 10 hot accounts and an Nvidia P100 GPU node, we can process 300 transactions a minute or 5 per second without the slightest possibility of double withdrawals. If we need to scale up, we just add more nodes and hot accounts.
Nanex's design is being implemented by Kucoin now and is regarded as the 'best practice' by the core development team. edit: note that this design isn't just the idempotent transactions, it also includes how we run multiple loadbalanced nodes and have self-consensus on all transactions
BIG EDIT: This can be done from the RPC entirely as well. This isn't something that has to be implemented outside of the node. The idempotent blocks can be created using the built-in wallet system or by providing the keys yourself.
Also, because I know it will come up: the block explorer issue with improper dates being shown.
This, too, was not an issue with the network. There are no timestamps in the Nano ledger and for that matter almost no cryptocurrency has timestamps, only references to past blocks. The explorer had an issue in which some transactions never had a timestamp recorded. This issue was resolved on January 19th, and any transactions that were missing a timestamp ended up getting that date.
Francesco is trying to use this too as some evidence something is wrong with Nano. That's simply not the case, and frankly a cryptocurrency exchange handling millions of dollars a day should not be relying on a third party tool to confirm their own account data.
In conclusion..
There is no issue with Nano. There never was. All the issues Bitgrail ever ran into was of their own doing because they didn't take time to think of how to implement the node properly, just how to 'get it done'. Kucoin unfortunately fell victim to the same thing, but they made things right and fixed their issue immediately. Francesco swept it under the rug and is now attempting to FUD Nano and the core development team in an attempt to save himself.
Stay strong, nanofam.
edit:
Here's another piece I did on 'why it's not an issue with XRB'. https://www.reddit.com/r/RaiBlocks/comments/7ozfrh/im_jaydubs_the_creator_of_raiexchange_ask_me/dsdfe17/
double edit:
Since I've got the platform for this and many people are asking - the core team never endorsed Bitgrail past saying it was a place you could exchange XRB. The time where Zack said 'funds are safe' (the main thing everyone references) was never in reference to Bitgrail's solvency. Those issues happened during a time when nobody thought Bitgrail was exit scamming or that they were hacked, rather it was FUD surrounding the node and the nano protocol itself and people were worried an issue in the node could have made people lose their money.
But let's get right down to the point of this post, the tl;dr:
There is no issue with the Nano protocol nor the Nano node. There is no double spending going on. The RPC API was being used improperly.
These issues are not 'double spend' in the traditional sense. Double spend assumes someone spent the same funds twice, which would be a major problem in any cryptocurrency and is basically the primary thing that has to be defeated in any cryptocurrency. That is not what is happening, nor was it ever what happened at Bitgrail nor KuCoin. People freak out when they hear 'double spend', and for good reason, but that is NOT what has been going on.
What happened in both the Bitgrail and Kucoin situations was an improper use of the RPC API.
In the RPC, there are two ways to do things:
1. Use the account/wallet system built into the node and allow the node to do everything for you, including sending money without you ever touching a raw block
2. Keep track of your private keys yourself, store nothing in the node, and only use the node for receiving transaction notifications, reviewing the Nano ledger, and broadcasting blocks you sign yourself outside of the node. (how Nanex does it)
Option 1: why it was used, why it exists, and why it's a bad idea
Option 1 is easy, and is how things are done for most traditional coin integrations on exchanges. Nano has that option, but it was never meant to be used by large services like exchanges. It was meant so someone could build their own UI or just use the command-line. It has its own use case, but not for exchanges.
The primary issue with doing it this way is that sends are not idempotent. Idempotency means that if I were to send the request more than once, it would only perform the action once or it would effectively have the same result. In this case, all you are doing is telling the node 'send X amount to this address'. It doesn't care if you already tried doing it before. It doesn't know if you're retrying something or just sending out more funds again. Since it's not idempotent, this means that any retry code in the case of intermittent failure could possibly end up sending out a transaction more than once.
There's also a variety of other issues like not being able to have fine-tuned control over what's happening, having much more difficulty in scaling across multiple nodes, etc.
This was the method that Bitgrail and Kucoin used. As a result, if anything in the system failed or resent a message for whatever reason, it would effectively 'double withdraw'. Again, I can't state this enough, it is not an issue in the NANO protocol. This is an issue in using the nano node properly.
Option 2: the proper way of doing things
If you keep track of your private keys yourself and only use the offline signing methods, this situation becomes much more unlikely. Your transactions become idempotent.
In the Nanex database, when a withdrawal request is submitted there is a unique identifier for that withdrawal. Your funds are immediately taken out of your Nanex wallet. Only then is the request sent to the actual nano node control system. It finds one of our hot accounts with an appropriate balance, locks the account for any further transactions, and creates and signs the block for the withdrawal. This block is then stored in the database with your unique withdrawal request ID.
All of this so far has not touched the node. When the block is ready, it will be sent to one of our nodes to be broadcasted. If, for whatever reason, that fails - it can be retried again because we're sending the exact same raw, signed block to the node. No matter what, a 'double spend' cannot occur because the operation is idempotent.
At this point, the account is still locked so no further withdrawals or deposits can be made to it. Our other nodes listen on the network to ensure it was broadcasted, and once it reaches consensus the account is unlocked for further transactions and the withdrawal is considered complete.
With 10 hot accounts and an Nvidia P100 GPU node, we can process 300 transactions a minute or 5 per second without the slightest possibility of double withdrawals. If we need to scale up, we just add more nodes and hot accounts.
Nanex's design is being implemented by Kucoin now and is regarded as the 'best practice' by the core development team. edit: note that this design isn't just the idempotent transactions, it also includes how we run multiple loadbalanced nodes and have self-consensus on all transactions
BIG EDIT: This can be done from the RPC entirely as well. This isn't something that has to be implemented outside of the node. The idempotent blocks can be created using the built-in wallet system or by providing the keys yourself.
Also, because I know it will come up: the block explorer issue with improper dates being shown.
This, too, was not an issue with the network. There are no timestamps in the Nano ledger and for that matter almost no cryptocurrency has timestamps, only references to past blocks. The explorer had an issue in which some transactions never had a timestamp recorded. This issue was resolved on January 19th, and any transactions that were missing a timestamp ended up getting that date.
Francesco is trying to use this too as some evidence something is wrong with Nano. That's simply not the case, and frankly a cryptocurrency exchange handling millions of dollars a day should not be relying on a third party tool to confirm their own account data.
In conclusion..
There is no issue with Nano. There never was. All the issues Bitgrail ever ran into was of their own doing because they didn't take time to think of how to implement the node properly, just how to 'get it done'. Kucoin unfortunately fell victim to the same thing, but they made things right and fixed their issue immediately. Francesco swept it under the rug and is now attempting to FUD Nano and the core development team in an attempt to save himself.
Stay strong, nanofam.
edit:
Here's another piece I did on 'why it's not an issue with XRB'. https://www.reddit.com/r/RaiBlocks/comments/7ozfrh/im_jaydubs_the_creator_of_raiexchange_ask_me/dsdfe17/
double edit:
Since I've got the platform for this and many people are asking - the core team never endorsed Bitgrail past saying it was a place you could exchange XRB. The time where Zack said 'funds are safe' (the main thing everyone references) was never in reference to Bitgrail's solvency. Those issues happened during a time when nobody thought Bitgrail was exit scamming or that they were hacked, rather it was FUD surrounding the node and the nano protocol itself and people were worried an issue in the node could have made people lose their money.
March 18, 2018, 09:15:32 AM
why is it still not in coinmarketcap? the coin has been developing for more than two years
Read this medium post: https://medium.com/@nanocurrency/nano-rebrand-announcement-9101528a7b76
https://www.reddit.com/r/RaiBlocks/ >>> https://www.reddit.com/r/nanocurrency/
Raiblock Cmc Link: https://coinmarketcap.com/currencies/nano/
March 18, 2018, 09:02:19 AM
Once this turmoil is over more quickly on recovery mode will be these coins which are being depressed because of some initial coin offering projects. Here I am referring at those based on fancy whitepapers and presentations raised money. Nano has received good compliments by reputable people in recent past all that is going to work in future.
why is it still not in coinmarketcap? the coin has been developing for more than two years March 18, 2018, 08:46:33 AM
Last 7 days NANO value has been cut in half volume has spiked 30M+ per day.....what are the fundamental reasons causing this?
1) Broader based market correction?
2) Breach / Hack?
3) Fundamentals of the block chain?
4) Management?
5) Government / Legal issues?
6) Industry / Country restrictions?
.....please no childish chat board digs, educated interpretations and hypothesis only, thanks.
1) Broader based market correction?
2) Breach / Hack?
3) Fundamentals of the block chain?
4) Management?
5) Government / Legal issues?
6) Industry / Country restrictions?
.....please no childish chat board digs, educated interpretations and hypothesis only, thanks.
March 18, 2018, 06:17:06 AM
Once this turmoil is over more quickly on recovery mode will be these coins which are being depressed because of some initial coin offering projects. Here I am referring at those based on fancy whitepapers and presentations raised money. Nano has received good compliments by reputable people in recent past all that is going to work in future.
why is it still not in coinmarketcap? the coin has been developing for more than two yearsIt's current ranking on market cap is on number 20. There you can see it listed as NANO and it is there for very long time. Before going through rebranding it was appearing there as Raiblocks under ticker of XRB. I think you are following the development nor project in mode correct that's why.
maybe we need to open a new BTT thread in here for people not following every step
March 18, 2018, 05:52:18 AM
It's current ranking on market cap is on number 20. There you can see it listed as NANO and it is there for very long time. Before going through rebranding it was appearing there as Raiblocks under ticker of XRB. I think you are following the development nor project in mode correct that's why.
March 18, 2018, 05:42:59 AM
Once this turmoil is over more quickly on recovery mode will be these coins which are being depressed because of some initial coin offering projects. Here I am referring at those based on fancy whitepapers and presentations raised money. Nano has received good compliments by reputable people in recent past all that is going to work in future.
why is it still not in coinmarketcap? the coin has been developing for more than two years March 18, 2018, 04:45:20 AM
Once this turmoil is over more quickly on recovery mode will be these coins which are being depressed because of some initial coin offering projects. Here I am referring at those based on fancy whitepapers and presentations raised money. Nano has received good compliments by reputable people in recent past all that is going to work in future.
March 18, 2018, 04:40:14 AM
So with the crypto depression going on, what does everyone forecast as the bottom for this coin? Are we headed back to where we started?
To be honest nobody knows what is happening right now that is globally down trend where all projects have same direction. I think we have some patience if we sell in panic than regret for it when this will find the recovery path.
March 17, 2018, 10:24:41 AM
I got ban for saying truth on xrb so the best is to post here.
Double Deposit on Binance 14th March.
It's funny how +B reacts "There is no double spend" and don't even the read the message properly before he speaks.
https://prnt.sc/irhe44
https://prnt.sc/irhe9x
https://prnt.sc/irhegm
Image of double deposits:
1. https://imgur.com/a/TTv4P
2. https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/370266023905198085/423607805199646720/Screen_Shot_2018-03-14_at_23.14.31.png
Double Deposit on Binance 14th March.
It's funny how +B reacts "There is no double spend" and don't even the read the message properly before he speaks.
https://prnt.sc/irhe44
https://prnt.sc/irhe9x
https://prnt.sc/irhegm
Image of double deposits:
1. https://imgur.com/a/TTv4P
2. https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/370266023905198085/423607805199646720/Screen_Shot_2018-03-14_at_23.14.31.png
It's not the Nano's network that caused this. It is the NANO wallet implementation of Binance. It is not easy to integrate a decentralized ledger service into a single database system like an exchange, bugs will appear especially with new tech like Nano.
Yes, I don' t ununderstand why some people have doubts about nano network. It always worked perfectly, even when there was no exchange. It's hard to integrate this new kind of blockchain or at least harder than bitcoin clone.
March 17, 2018, 10:07:19 AM
So with the crypto depression going on, what does everyone forecast as the bottom for this coin? Are we headed back to where we started?
March 15, 2018, 03:35:13 PM
I got ban for saying truth on xrb so the best is to post here.
Double Deposit on Binance 14th March.
It's funny how +B reacts "There is no double spend" and don't even the read the message properly before he speaks.
https://prnt.sc/irhe44
https://prnt.sc/irhe9x
https://prnt.sc/irhegm
Image of double deposits:
1. https://imgur.com/a/TTv4P
2. https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/370266023905198085/423607805199646720/Screen_Shot_2018-03-14_at_23.14.31.png
Double Deposit on Binance 14th March.
It's funny how +B reacts "There is no double spend" and don't even the read the message properly before he speaks.
https://prnt.sc/irhe44
https://prnt.sc/irhe9x
https://prnt.sc/irhegm
Image of double deposits:
1. https://imgur.com/a/TTv4P
2. https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/370266023905198085/423607805199646720/Screen_Shot_2018-03-14_at_23.14.31.png
It's not the Nano's network that caused this. It is the NANO wallet implementation of Binance. It is not easy to integrate a decentralized ledger service into a single database system like an exchange, bugs will appear especially with new tech like Nano.
I hope people could understand that this is not because of the tech behind nano but it is due to the nano wallet on binance, some people are blaming the team for causing this bug, this is not the team's fault. Double spending have already been discussed in the whitepaper and it's not really possible in the nano network. I hope binance could take an action regarding this issue, people might abuse this and it may cause a huge problem within the nano community, we haven't entirely recovered from the bitgrail fud yet so something like this happening to nano isn't healthy for the market at all especially to the price.
March 15, 2018, 02:10:49 PM
Benefits of Universal Blocks
https://medium.com/@nanocurrency/benefits-of-universal-blocks-3354792fe681
https://medium.com/@nanocurrency/benefits-of-universal-blocks-3354792fe681
March 15, 2018, 12:56:34 PM
any news on a hardware wallet integration? read some news a time ago
March 15, 2018, 12:16:25 PM
I got ban for saying truth on xrb so the best is to post here.
Double Deposit on Binance 14th March.
It's funny how +B reacts "There is no double spend" and don't even the read the message properly before he speaks.
https://prnt.sc/irhe44
https://prnt.sc/irhe9x
https://prnt.sc/irhegm
Image of double deposits:
1. https://imgur.com/a/TTv4P
2. https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/370266023905198085/423607805199646720/Screen_Shot_2018-03-14_at_23.14.31.png
Double Deposit on Binance 14th March.
It's funny how +B reacts "There is no double spend" and don't even the read the message properly before he speaks.
https://prnt.sc/irhe44
https://prnt.sc/irhe9x
https://prnt.sc/irhegm
Image of double deposits:
1. https://imgur.com/a/TTv4P
2. https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/370266023905198085/423607805199646720/Screen_Shot_2018-03-14_at_23.14.31.png
It's not the Nano's network that caused this. It is the NANO wallet implementation of Binance. It is not easy to integrate a decentralized ledger service into a single database system like an exchange, bugs will appear especially with new tech like Nano.
March 15, 2018, 11:41:36 AM
I hope you guys are taking advantage of these $NANO prices. I know it's sounds redundant, but it's true. $NANO is too valuable, and at these prices..it's like Christmas up in here.
You should not only take advantage of the Nano price but go get some other altcoins too, I'd recommend got get some NEO and Electronium. NEO as it has a great long term future and Electronium as it's really very cheap just now and is one-to-watch.
$NANO was super cheap last night, so was $NEO. They're both on their way up now. Hopefully they'll keep it up. I don't like Electroneum. I wouldn't buy it if it were free.
The term cheap implies that you do know what the right price is
The problem in the industry right now is that nobody knows how much these projects should really be worth. 
March 15, 2018, 10:32:05 AM
NANO has become new favorite toy for traders. Current volatility yields great profits. Hopefully will manage to break the resistance soon enough.
Just seen this coin. its crazy. from cap in 300k to 1.5 billion in on year. What happen with this coin?Does what it says on the tin (largely), I suppose. One of late 2017/early 2018's hypecoins for sure. Will be following this one with interest, it's a real shame what's happened with Bitgrail and such though. Wish the devs and community all the best moving forward.
Quote
No fees: The RaiBlocks network has no notion of fees.
Low latency: Transactions are natively processed instantly giving a responsive experience.
Scalability: Micropayments require a system capable of significant scalability
Simplicity: Users have a simple experience without technical jargon.
Low latency: Transactions are natively processed instantly giving a responsive experience.
Scalability: Micropayments require a system capable of significant scalability
Simplicity: Users have a simple experience without technical jargon.
Thank you for explaine. Why they made re-brading? Does theyhave smartcontracts as well like Ethereum? They planning to launch ICO on their platform?
Nano doesn't have smart contracts. It's only a currency but (RaiBlocks) Nano has a brilliant crypto motto..."Do one thing, and do it well."
March 14, 2018, 04:42:43 PM
Sorry for Polluting the NANO thread with this but I wanna vent some anger.
"- Bitgrail still sees themselves as not responsible for the theft and therefore they believe they have no obligation to refund stolen coins
- purely voluntarily to help affected customers, Bitgrail is going to create a cash fund to reimburse customers for stolen funds over time"
You gotta be Fing shitting me .. Not responsible .. there is VERY CLEAR EVIDENCE that they= HE is VERY MUCH RESPONCIBLE.
... they already said it on reddit ...
NO ONE IS GOING TO USE THAT SHIT EXCHANGE ANYMORE These Tokens are completely worthless , I would like to get my 20% back And be part of the group that will eventually sue his ass for robbing us But if its a choice between one or the other there is no choice im going to sue his ass.
So he gets us to agree to "trade" 80% of our NANO for tokens that are worth NOTHING and then when their price drops from 10 usd to 0.00000000001 usd he will just buy them off and he will be free of his debt and we will have lost 80% of our money.
I don't understand why he would think it's not his fault. It was his exchange and his laughably poor code, if he isn't responsible for it then who is? What an idiot, of course he is to blame."- Bitgrail still sees themselves as not responsible for the theft and therefore they believe they have no obligation to refund stolen coins
- purely voluntarily to help affected customers, Bitgrail is going to create a cash fund to reimburse customers for stolen funds over time"
You gotta be Fing shitting me .. Not responsible .. there is VERY CLEAR EVIDENCE that they= HE is VERY MUCH RESPONCIBLE.
... they already said it on reddit ...
NO ONE IS GOING TO USE THAT SHIT EXCHANGE ANYMORE These Tokens are completely worthless , I would like to get my 20% back And be part of the group that will eventually sue his ass for robbing us But if its a choice between one or the other there is no choice im going to sue his ass.
So he gets us to agree to "trade" 80% of our NANO for tokens that are worth NOTHING and then when their price drops from 10 usd to 0.00000000001 usd he will just buy them off and he will be free of his debt and we will have lost 80% of our money.
When Polo was hacked years ago they pretty much said, whoops sorry guys we screwed up by writing crap code and running our site poorly. They gave everyone back their money and increased security greatly. After that there weren't any more issues. That's how normal business is supposed to function. This Bitgrail guy is an obvious clown.
Yeah I just don't get the guy, he just keeps on making excuses and blaming others for his mistakes instead of making progress. All he do is blame the nano team for what happened. I don't think it's bad to accept your mistakes, it's so obvious that the reason for what happened is because of his poor codes, it wasn't just nano that was affected other cryptocurrencies like eth,bch,ltc and doge are also affected but he just couldn't admit it that's why upto now there still isn't any real resolution yet. This resolution that he is currently offering is just plain stupid, sometimes I think all of this is his plan all along so that he can create a token that could grow in value in just a very short period of time.
March 14, 2018, 01:27:09 PM
Sorry for Polluting the NANO thread with this but I wanna vent some anger.
"- Bitgrail still sees themselves as not responsible for the theft and therefore they believe they have no obligation to refund stolen coins
- purely voluntarily to help affected customers, Bitgrail is going to create a cash fund to reimburse customers for stolen funds over time"
You gotta be Fing shitting me .. Not responsible .. there is VERY CLEAR EVIDENCE that they= HE is VERY MUCH RESPONCIBLE.
... they already said it on reddit ...
NO ONE IS GOING TO USE THAT SHIT EXCHANGE ANYMORE These Tokens are completely worthless , I would like to get my 20% back And be part of the group that will eventually sue his ass for robbing us But if its a choice between one or the other there is no choice im going to sue his ass.
So he gets us to agree to "trade" 80% of our NANO for tokens that are worth NOTHING and then when their price drops from 10 usd to 0.00000000001 usd he will just buy them off and he will be free of his debt and we will have lost 80% of our money.
I don't understand why he would think it's not his fault. It was his exchange and his laughably poor code, if he isn't responsible for it then who is? What an idiot, of course he is to blame."- Bitgrail still sees themselves as not responsible for the theft and therefore they believe they have no obligation to refund stolen coins
- purely voluntarily to help affected customers, Bitgrail is going to create a cash fund to reimburse customers for stolen funds over time"
You gotta be Fing shitting me .. Not responsible .. there is VERY CLEAR EVIDENCE that they= HE is VERY MUCH RESPONCIBLE.
... they already said it on reddit ...
NO ONE IS GOING TO USE THAT SHIT EXCHANGE ANYMORE These Tokens are completely worthless , I would like to get my 20% back And be part of the group that will eventually sue his ass for robbing us But if its a choice between one or the other there is no choice im going to sue his ass.
So he gets us to agree to "trade" 80% of our NANO for tokens that are worth NOTHING and then when their price drops from 10 usd to 0.00000000001 usd he will just buy them off and he will be free of his debt and we will have lost 80% of our money.
When Polo was hacked years ago they pretty much said, whoops sorry guys we screwed up by writing crap code and running our site poorly. They gave everyone back their money and increased security greatly. After that there weren't any more issues. That's how normal business is supposed to function. This Bitgrail guy is an obvious clown.
Jump to: